[1.9-1.10] Global Construction

[Tarheel1999]

@Kuldaralagh Were the drills deployed in the VAB? If so why not just retract them and make a new diy kit?

[Kuldaralagh]

1 minute ago, Tarheel1999 said:

@Kuldaralagh Were the drills deployed in the VAB? If so why not just retract them and make a new diy kit?

Nope. If it was that simple I would have figured it out.

I'll give it another try in the afternoon and if it deploys too high I will hack gravity and see if it survives.

Anyway,  I have the same base sitting right beside the runway,  that I launched directly when I was testing for functionality,  and apparently those huge tanks don't handle time wrap so well when full.  The juke the base gets when dewarping is enough to send one rolling and the other expontaniously combusts.

I might have to get back to the drawing board.

[Kuldaralagh]

I might just solve my problem with launch clamps. I'll see if that works.

[Kuldaralagh]

Ok this is getting funny. Tried it again but this time when it finished deploying and started fixing to the ground, the box just launched 100 meters in the air.

I should use it as rockets propulsion cause it was so quick I almost lost it in the air.

Maybe if I can't build bases I have to make a lemonade out of this glitch.

Did it again.  Same result 

[Kuldaralagh]

Apparently was just time warping.

I tried wo warping on deployment and it stayed on the ground this time. 

The problem this time was that I added the launch clamps and they ended a couple of meters above ground. 

A tank broke with the fall. 

 

Again I'll try it wo the launch clamps. 

And if that doesn't work I'll hack gravity. 

[Tarheel1999]

Got it. If you really want allista to take a look at this you need to provide more info. For starters, which drills are using? My suggestion would be to create the smallest craft you can that reproduces this and then post a link to the craft file (dropbox, google docs, etc.). Ideally the craft would have no mods. If that's not possible, use a few as possible to reproduce and tell allista which mods are necessary to reproduce. 

Also, I remember their being some talk earlier in the thread about jumping kits so you might want to browse through the thread. 

[Kuldaralagh]

Like the old saying goes, 6th time is a charm.

 

I guess it had nothing to do with the drills. 

It was just time warping during the deployment that did the weird thing.

The unexpected launches as well.

Maybe a warning label on the model of the dyi  kit saying don't rush on deployment would be a good fix for this.

It was just a few minutes, but I didn't want to lose them. Ended up losing hours to get it done.

Now the base sits marvelously next to mmyy runway eating away precious fps when attempting a landing.

Warranty void if deployed in a hurry

Edited March 27, 2017 by Kuldaralagh

[AcidEric]

On 3/23/2017 at 3:10 AM, Rehpic said:

When I "launch" a section of my base on some moon, after unpacking it jumps and does a flip.  Is there any way to prevent this?

I tend to set them up on launch clamps as if they are going to be launched, Set the clamps so the base can fall a meter or so between the clamps. Build the kit, finalize it, then when it appears its on clamps attached to the ground ready to 'launch' (no jumping). you then have a choice - stage the clamps let the base settle to the ground and disassemble the left over clamps. or leave the base on the clamps to act like legs (particularly useful on slopes and uneven ground).

Hope this helps 

AE

[Rehpic]

1 minute ago, AcidEric said:

I tend to set them up on launch clamps as if they are going to be launched, Set the clamps so the base can fall a meter or so between the clamps. Build the kit, finalize it, then when it appears its on clamps attached to the ground ready to 'launch' (no jumping). you then have a choice - stage the clamps let the base settle to the ground and disassemble the left over clamps. or leave the base on the clamps to act like legs (particularly useful on slopes and uneven ground).

Hope this helps 

AE

That is a good idea I will have to try some time. I did find that if I put the base up on landing legs it would bounce with a lot less force. I suspect that the force is relative to the volume of the vessel that spawns under the ground, so putting it up on legs (or clamps) will result in a lot less force than having the body of the base half sunk into the ground.

[AcidEric]

50 minutes ago, Rehpic said:

That is a good idea I will have to try some time. I did find that if I put the base up on landing legs it would bounce with a lot less force. I suspect that the force is relative to the volume of the vessel that spawns under the ground, so putting it up on legs (or clamps) will result in a lot less force than having the body of the base half sunk into the ground.

like this one I sent to Minmus recently 

as you can see the clamps are quite short

Deployed with some extra bits left over from my last base at this location (they were expensive lol)

with the resource tab open

just more pics and the next project can be seen in the back ground (the massive kit being built)

 

AE

[TheJollyDodger]

I'm having a strange problem (not sure really what it means) I am using the USI Kolonization mod that has GC built in. I was redirected here to ask my question from that forum, hopefully someone can help me!  

When I display certain objects in the vab or if I am flying and either crash, decouple a booster or pretty much do anything that involves collisions or physics etc. I get a log display on my screen (I turned this capability on through the debug menu) that reads:

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Tundra.Workshop250' is inactive!

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Tundra.AssemblyPlant' is inactive!

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Ranger.Workshop' is inactive!

 

I have also noticed that the objects mentioned (ranger.workshop/tundra.workshop/tundra.assemblyplant} are nowhere to be seen in the tech tree or vab. I'm not really sure what this means hopefully someone can point me in the right direction... 

[theJesuit]

Hi @allista,

I'm really enjoying this mod.  I would like to mod some additional functionality.  Is there a way for me to create a new kerbal Trait and not use (or additionally use but make the new Trait equivalent to a L4 or 5  engineer)?

Thanks.

Peace.

[RoverDude]

Just have them use the ConstructionSkill

[theJesuit]

10 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Just have them use the ConstructionSkill

Away from computet currently, so i cant test (and it was late last night). I think I tried this but GC would let the Kit deploy but not start construction with an error that Engineers weren't in the workshop this was if I had Surgeons with Construction Skill.  If I put engineers in it worked fine.

Edit - thanks @RoverDude, and @allista, I did think that the ConstructionSkill was the way to go, but in tiredness last night couldn't get it to work. I suspect spelling. It is working now!

I also assume that giving the Engineers the modifier of 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 1.0 that only L4 and L5 engineers will be able to do any construction?

Peace.

Edited April 21, 2017 by theJesuit
Solved Issue

[baldamundo]

On 13/04/2017 at 7:04 PM, TheJollyDodger said:

I'm having a strange problem (not sure really what it means) I am using the USI Kolonization mod that has GC built in. I was redirected here to ask my question from that forum, hopefully someone can help me!  

When I display certain objects in the vab or if I am flying and either crash, decouple a booster or pretty much do anything that involves collisions or physics etc. I get a log display on my screen (I turned this capability on through the debug menu) that reads:

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Tundra.Workshop250' is inactive!

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Tundra.AssemblyPlant' is inactive!

Coroutine couldn't be started because the the game object 'Ranger.Workshop' is inactive!

 

I have also noticed that the objects mentioned (ranger.workshop/tundra.workshop/tundra.assemblyplant} are nowhere to be seen in the tech tree or vab. I'm not really sure what this means hopefully someone can point me in the right direction... 

I've been having the same issue too fwiw.

[Tau137]

On 4/26/2017 at 8:53 AM, baldamundo said:

I've been having the same issue too fwiw.

The error is generated for every part that has GroundWorkshop module, on every part count change (crash or decoupling).

[Johould]

Starting construction on a DIY kit loaded with a vessel design that includes DIY kits will destroy the solar system. Do you have plans for how that might work?

Besides just generally wondering what would happen, I was thinking of building a spindly exoatmospheric freighter on minimus, already loaded for a colonization mission, including DIY kits. I think it would make sense to just dump parts from  the child kits into one big box for easier launch, so it makes sense that at least the full mass and price of kits from the design would add to the new kit, with it's assembly time representing just sorting out and repacking the contents for the smaller kits 

 

For another experiment, I could build a DIY kit from an OSE workshop but it came out as an empty kit. There is a bit of thematic overlap between Ground Construction and OSE Workshops with the construction window showing a sequence of parts being built. It's a bit odd to use both, when OSE workshops builds parts completely from off-planet resources - DIY kits definitely save on assembly but it's a bit odd that then assembling the parts automatically is the only step requiring the specially shipped DIY kit - although that kind of fits with your plan to support orbital construction by having hangers previously-built parts according to ship designs.

If you think of it like that, maybe the expanded DIY kit is acting like a temporary construction enclosure, and invisible dedicated KIS storage for the vessel parts, perhaps along with something special that makes building the individual parts cheaper.

Then the low tech option for building a sort of kit offworld would be building actual parts and shipping over a KIS container, or just parts that require advanced ingredients. Perhaps the process to build an actual DIY kit could require starting with the parts in an inventory, and then take more time/work trimming off excess mass (perhaps returning it as (some fraction of) the same resources needed to build the kit). Requiring enough KIS storage to have all parts on hand rather than allowing them to be manufactured and packed incrementally might be a decent way to require bigger bases to pack kits of bigger vessels.

[theJesuit]

5 hours ago, Johould said:

Starting construction on a DIY kit loaded with a vessel design that includes DIY kits will destroy the solar system. Do you have plans for how that might work?

Besides just generally wondering what would happen, I was thinking of building a spindly exoatmospheric freighter on minimus, already loaded for a colonization mission, including DIY kits. I think it would make sense to just dump parts from  the child kits into one big box for easier launch, so it makes sense that at least the full mass and price of kits from the design would add to the new kit, with it's assembly time representing just sorting out and repacking the contents for the smaller kits 

 

For another experiment, I could build a DIY kit from an OSE workshop but it came out as an empty kit. There is a bit of thematic overlap between Ground Construction and OSE Workshops with the construction window showing a sequence of parts being built. It's a bit odd to use both, when OSE workshops builds parts completely from off-planet resources - DIY kits definitely save on assembly but it's a bit odd that then assembling the parts automatically is the only step requiring the specially shipped DIY kit - although that kind of fits with your plan to support orbital construction by having hangers previously-built parts according to ship designs.

If you think of it like that, maybe the expanded DIY kit is acting like a temporary construction enclosure, and invisible dedicated KIS storage for the vessel parts, perhaps along with something special that makes building the individual parts cheaper.

Then the low tech option for building a sort of kit offworld would be building actual parts and shipping over a KIS container, or just parts that require advanced ingredients. Perhaps the process to build an actual DIY kit could require starting with the parts in an inventory, and then take more time/work trimming off excess mass (perhaps returning it as (some fraction of) the same resources needed to build the kit). Requiring enough KIS storage to have all parts on hand rather than allowing them to be manufactured and packed incrementally might be a decent way to require bigger bases to pack kits of bigger vessels.

My Simplex mod aims to solve the issue of transporting kits around by using Extra planetary Lanchpads to create the DIY kits. I hope to have the updated beta with this functionality sorted by Sunday if you can wait that long.  

EPL in Simplex won't be able to construct other craft.  It will be acting as a 'specialist module workshop' as the DIY Kits are based off the number of cfg modules of each part.

Based on what you wish to do @Johould I may allow for the docking ports to also be built so that you can pick up Kits and attach them to other craft... unless this is possible with KIS?

Peace.

[Johould]

Well, I don't mind just using EPL to build DIY kits for now, and I'm not far enough in my new save to really need to build kits away from Kerbin anyway.

 

KIS will definitely let you attach kits to ships, or docking ports to kits - the DIY kit itself might be too heavy to lift conveniently.

[Chaia]

What level do kerbal engineers need to actually build things?

I'm using this mod in conjunction with USI. I put some engineers in a workshop, check if the workshop is actually activated (an USI one). Your mods UI works so far, but when I want to build things, it always says "No engineers", despite having multiple 0-Stars onboard

[Terwin]

2 hours ago, Chaia said:

What level do kerbal engineers need to actually build things?

I'm using this mod in conjunction with USI. I put some engineers in a workshop, check if the workshop is actually activated (an USI one). Your mods UI works so far, but when I want to build things, it always says "No engineers", despite having multiple 0-Stars onboard

I believe the GC calculation uses level-hours, so level-0 engineers are the same as non-engineers, as they provide no levels for production.

Send them to orbit to get their first star and they should work fine.

[Chaia]

20 hours ago, Terwin said:

I believe the GC calculation uses level-hours, so level-0 engineers are the same as non-engineers, as they provide no levels for production.

Send them to orbit to get their first star and they should work fine.

I will try that now and report back afterwards

 

Edit: That was the issue, engineers (and USI technicans/mechanics need 1 star for building ships). OP should mention that in the first post for the requirements

Edited May 22, 2017 by Chaia

[juanml82]

Hi, it's not letting me launch a vessel. Here's a screenshot

There is nothing in the debug console and I have no idea what may be causing it. The "Launch" button is in red

[marshingo]

Needs update for 1.3

[Brigadier]

1 hour ago, marshingo said:

Needs update for 1.3

I'm sure you just want to know but rest assured that the mod developer is fully aware that v1.3 is out.  It is considered impolite to push devs for any info because they're volunteers doing this for the fun of it.  Having people pester them diminishes that enjoyment.

Just play with KSP v1.2.2 for a little while longer and be patient.